I have been invited to review a paper for a journal. I have no experience being a reviewer. I would like to do it but i want to know if it is worth the hard work for my career or not. If you believe i should do it then a couple of tips from you would be a good start.
Dear
I think it is our obligations to advance human history , research quality and to build a truly scientific development.
From my experience as Editor in Chief for a medical journal (IJHRS), I think your effort as reviewer is needed.
There is a long list of things you have to do as reviewer, please go to the journal reviewer or author instructions to see the journal regulations and requirements. Other things you need to observe like, is the method was suitable?, the results are expected from this method, is the stat analysis suitable?, and many other small details
Good luck
If you intend to publish research in peer reviewed journals, do you really feel that you should ask other people to review your work if you are not prepared to review the work of others? Consider reviewing the paper to the best of your ability, informing the editors that this is the first paper that you review and asking them whether you will be able to receive some feedback on your review – whether it met their expectations, whether your report was too detailed, or contained too little detail. It is not the job of the reviewer to see papers through to review, but to provide criticism (constructive and otherwise), however there might be occasions where a reviewer can indicate shortcomings that greatly improve the research as well as the manuscript. In such situations, you need to decide how willing you are to assist the researchers. As editor-in-chief, I have seen some wonderful acts of generosity, where reviewers have clearly dedicated hours to providing assistance to authors – especially students – who have clearly received inadequate advice and supervision. Embracing the duties of a reviewer and doing your best to do a good job will be a tremendous learning experience.
A good review should provide a review of the research presented, including an assessment of whether the the aims have been clarified. Failure to explain the purpose of the work leaves readers wondering whether the researcher knew what he or she was doing (sadly, often justifiably). Positive criticism alongside recommendations to improve the paper and explanations of its inadequacy enable reviewers to assess whether the authors knew what they were doing and whether you, as a reviewer, have genuinely assessed the work in a sufficiently profound manner using expert knowledge.
Finally, I would suggest that, when you find that you are only able to review part of a paper, point this out the the editors, explaining which areas they will need to obtain a second opinion on. This will facilitate the decision-making process as the editors can compare reports and determine whether a third opinion is required. A word of warning – your first few reviews are likely to be very time-consuming, but it will get easier.
Salameh Aldajah and Suzy Lidstrom thank you so much for such a detailed insight of what i was looking for. I have accepted the invitation and i will try my level best to do what is required of me. I will happy to spend my time on it as it is what a researcher should do. Thank you for your time.
You are welcome, Shah. When you receive reviews of your own work, you will appreciate what constitutes a good report. The initial information is generally directed towards the editor, and enables him or her to assess whether the content as a whole is appropriate (for instance, whether a topic is too applied for a journal that tends to deal with pure science, or whether it only rehashes ideas that have been presented before). In my opinion, the remainder of the review should be written with both the editor and the authors in mind, as the review process (when performed with generosity) can provide insights of value to the researchers. For the reviewer, it can be a learning experience, however when you encounter low quality work, you would do well to recall that the purpose of peer review is to filter out work of insufficient quality, so you are providing a valuable service. Good luck!
I have only one conference paper published and one paper was rejected by a journal. And i understand how important reviewer's comments are for a paper. It makes sense to me and getting clearer with new experiences. Thank You Suzy. Highly appreciated.
Ismail W. R. Taifa I already did. And it was a good experience. I learned much.
Afraa Ibrahim
I already did. It was a good experience. Thank you for the encouragement.
Should accept it, its a way for you to improve your writing skills
Dear Shah,
Before you accept, please read reviewer guidance, for example:
https://www.elsevier.com/reviewers/how-to-review (or from the journal from which you got it paper)
Reviewing process is very important not only for the Authors, but for the reviewer itself. Think that someone review your paper as well. I sow that you already publish few papers, so be brave and accept if its familiar to you. You must start once with that.
Gretings
prof. Grgur
Of course you should meet if you are in your field .. I wish you success
… Read more
You need to start sometimes and it is your chance now with some help/consult form other good researchers.
Just read the article carefully and write your report: Saying whether the idea is new, the analysis is acceptable, the theory correct or has measure or minor comments, is the article similar to other publications, state typos if exist, etc. If you find high criticism, recommend rejection. Otherwise, recommend either major or minor revision.
You need to start sometimes and it is your chance now with some help/consult form other good researchers.
Just read the article carefully and write your report: Saying whether the idea is new, the analysis is acceptable, the theory correct or has measure or minor comments, is the article similar to other publications, state typos if exist, etc. If you find high criticism, recommend rejection. Otherwise, recommend either major or minor revision.
It would be useful to be a reviewer, though it is the first time for you. You need to start this service which is your chance now with some help from other good researchers. Read the article carefully and write your report: describe the idea of the paper briefly, saying whether it is new, the analysis is acceptable, materials are correct or not, search for major and/or minor criticism, comments, typos, etc., if exist. If you find high criticism (eg, the article copies materials from other publications without citation), state it and recommend either minor revision, major revision, or rejection.
It would be useful to be a reviewer, though it is the first time for you; any work starts with first one. You need to start this service which is your chance now with some help from other good researchers. Read the article carefully and write your report: describe the idea of the paper briefly, saying whether it is new, original and/or interesting. Are the analyses, materials, grammar, spelling, etc., acceptable or not. Also, search for major and/or minor criticism, comments, typos, etc., if exist. If you find high criticism (eg, the article copies materials from other publications without citation), state it and recommend either minor revision, major revision, or rejection.
Thank you all for the suggestions. Mehiddin Al-Baali Rana Z. Al-Kawaz Sulaiman Mohammed Ibrahim
Yes you should review the paper if and only if you have sufficient knowledge of that subject or field about which paper is written , one can easily predict after going through the abstract that has been sent along with the invitation that whether he can review the paper or not......... but remember to strictly follow the review ethics in vogue........ Reviewer should always follow the review ethics.....
if you dont have sufficient background and expertise in that specific area in which paper is written than i will not recommend to review the paper ....
The publishers Elsebier have just produced an online course for those new to peer review https://researcheracademy.elsevier.com/navigating-peer-review/certified-peer-reviewer-course . You will have to sign up for their research academy if you want a certificate.
Thank you all for providing fruitful suggestions. Your suggestions motivated me to become a reviewer and today I am a reviewer in highly prestigious journals including IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy.
Hello Shah Fahad
Out of interest, did they invite you only once or more than once?
Dear Joseph C Lee ,
Thank you for taking interest in this discussion. I must say this post is almost 3 years old.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Psychology
- Mental Processes
- Learning